novatownhall blog

Where you are held accountable for your convictions and record

Browsing Posts in Politics

So, the Калифорния legislature passed a bill restricting government surveillance with drones. Gov. “Moonbeam” Brown vetoed it.

Check out the stupidity:

Brown said in a statement that the bill appears to be too narrow and could go beyond what the state and federal constitutions would prohibit.

“There are undoubtedly circumstances where a warrant is appropriate,” he wrote. “The bill’s exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution.”

Uh, Guvn’r, if the bill didn’t put tighter restrictions on your misuse of drones than the U.S. and Калифорния Constitutions require, there would be NO DAMNED POINT TO THE BILL AT ALL.

The reason I first went to The Angry Bear was posts this one. (Too bad it’s infested with intolerant liberals in charge.)

The author of this post is the current (and last) Postmaster of Webster, NC, and speaks of his area of expertise, the United States Postal Service.

It always confuses the big-government liberals, stuck in the false-dichotomy mindset that says if they support Big Government and all Big Government programs, then conservatives opposed to Big Government must oppose all Big Government programs. What they cannot seem to wrap their minds around is the concept that we DO support the U.S. government’s running those programs which a the U.S. Constitution says it is supposed to run. Among these are the Army, the Navy, and the Postal Service.

So why this fascination (among conservatives mostly, I suppose — I’m sure you will correct me if I am wrong) with the idea that the Postal Service is supposed to be self-supporting? We do not expect the Army to be self-supporting. It probably could be. We could probably sell enough weapons, and rent out enough troops, to make it so. We do not expect the Department of the Interior to be self-supporting. We could probably place high enough rents on mining and grazing operations, and high enough fees for visitors, to make it so.

The point is that profits are not what the government is about. Efficiency is desirable, but the primary mission of those agencies is to provide the services, not to turn a profit.

This is why we conservatives oppose Big Government — because Big Government is inefficient. That is why the Constitution cedes to the U.S. government only those things that cannot be done by the States and the People. At the time of our founding, the operations of the Postal Service could not be done by any other agency than the government of the United States. If, in the age of email, UPS, and Federal Express, we think that that situation no longer pertains, then we should amend the Constitution to remove that Power from the U.S. government. But killing a government program by forcing it to turn a profit, knowing that government programs are by nature inefficient, is, at best, disingenuous.

Well, our House of Representatives have voted to arm the “lite” jihadists (that we are calling “moderates”) in Syria to the tune of billions of dollars (that we do not have by the way). The Senate likewise passing this madness is pretty much fait accompli. Oh, to be a weapons contractors this month! (Or even a private military contractor)

So after Asaad is gone and the Islamic State group withdraws (note, NOT defeated), the war hawks (read: McCain and Graham) will come back and demand that we “secure the victory” by paying for a massive rebuilding project and oversee the installation of a democracy. That will cost another trillion dollars for so! Oh, and meanwhile the Islamic extremists (armed with our weapons) will continue guerrilla tactics, suicide bombings and such against us during the new occupation. No one is even debating ANY of that. And the biggest irony will be that Obama will have led us into this disaster.

The Islamic extremists have baiting us into spending ourselves into oblivion (to what end?) and are doing it again. Will we have a nation to leave to our children following all of this madness. But at least our ruling elite will be taken care of right? They have been leading a war on the rest of us for the past 20 years or so.

I can only hope that by 2016, perhaps neo-cons will be back out of favor again. But then again, are we – as the NY Times mentioned – in the “great unraveling”? The elites are leading us into decline and everyone is clapping for the freak parade.

I have read till my eyes were bloodshot. I picked the articles I felt most appropriate and informative. If you REALLY, REALLY want to know what you are up against, read them. Yes, they can be a VERY long read but we’ll worth it if you seek good understanding. For me, the more I read, the more confused I got because of all the ambiguity, inference, and just the “muddy lines” of acceptance. Know this: the Executive Branch is more powerful than you may have thought, and without constraints or watchdogs in all matters, can easily get out of control by things perceived. Bottom line is that we, the people, may suffer greatly for nothing more than political ideology, favoritism to certain groups or individuals, or just visions of grandeur. This is a case for me of “the more you know, the less you like”. That’s just me.

The first article is a basic primer for very general knowledge.

This article here delves very deeply into pros, cons, and citing examples from various administrations, focusing heavily on the Clinton Administration.

And, lastly, this article , which talks further about more presidents and their orders.

There are plenty more articles out there but I learned enough and picked these 3 that would allow you to learn enough. I guess perception is what is needed here as to what type of America is being built. Most of these orders don’t get reviewed by successive administrations, which means we are stuck with them. Not good. Not good at all.

 

10603455_861874225785_3677841006410681136_n

Nice quote above from my good friend William Adama…

This article (click here to read it), written by a retired Lt Colonel whose son was killed by police, makes a good case on why we really need to rethink how law enforcement engages the public. They have a useful and necessary job to do, but the author points out that LE has simply become too militarized. He writes:

Our country is simply not paying enough attention to the terrible lack of accountability of police departments and the way it affects all of us—regardless of race or ethnicity. Because if a blond-haired, blue-eyed boy — that was my son, Michael — can be shot in the head under a street light with his hands cuffed behind his back, in front of five eyewitnesses (including his mother and sister), and his father was a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who flew in three wars for his country — that’s me — and I still couldn’t get anything done about it, then Joe the plumber and Javier the roofer aren’t going to be able to do anything about it either.

While we certainly do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water on this, many of us believe that it is time to re-evaluate law enforcement as it interacts with free society. This should certainly not be viewed as an indictment against all police officers – the vast majority of them are fine and honorable community servants. But like any career, it must be evaluated and changed in keeping with our times. (As a side note, perhaps it would help a bit if our elected ‘elite’ would stop passing so many laws that need to be “enforced”)

I personally do not want to see law enforcement officers with .50 caliber machine guns mounted on turrets and other military hardware rolling on our streets. We only need to see these types of weapons in our communities if we are under attack by some outside invasion force. As we continue our unfortunate descent into a low trust society I fear that we will only see the polar opposite of my wishes.

I recognize that law enforcement is a very stressful job, but those who chose it did so willingly. And just as we expect teachers, doctors, pilots and others to do their jobs in a professional manner at all times, we should have the same expectation of law enforcement. Law enforcement keeps the law just like we’re supposed to do. Law enforcement does not rule the people.

Read the Lt Colonel’s entire article here.

 

…and by “it” I mean Iraq.

I am not saying that we need to “fix” it, but seeing as how our decision to remove Saddam Hussein and attempt to “install” a democracy has unintentionally turned that that nation into (in the words of Senator Rand Paul) a “jihadist wonderland” we have some obligation to help the Christians, Yazidis and other ethnic minorities that are being threatened with genocide by the forces of the group calling itself the “Islamic State” (i.e., ISIS/ISIL). I am saying this as a very firm non-interventionist that is often appalled by the hawkish rhetoric that comes from John McCain, Lindsey Graham and the rest of the “invade the world” caucus.

Let me clarify by saying that I fully recognize that Saddam Hussein was indeed a very bad guy (as was Qadhafi in Libya) but he at least kept the Jihadist hordes from murdering Christians. However, thanks to Neo-con arrogance, we removed the iron boot of Saddam from the necks of the jihadists and now Christians, Yazidis and any even other Muslims who disagree with their version of Islam are being murdered. Centuries old churches have been burned to the ground. Historic Christian lands have been abandoned. Thousands have been displaced. AND the jihadists are doing all of this with weapons that WE provided! I shudder when I think about it.

That said, we are where we are and we have to help those people. This video below of a Yazidi member of the Iraq Parliament begging for help against the Islamist hordes that are massacring her people broke my heart:

Watch Mark Arabo (an Arab Christian) speak about the crimes of ISIS against Christians in Mosul:

YES! He said that they are beheading CHILDREN!

The question is what to do?

In my humble estimation:

- Support a free and independent Kurdistan! Netanyahu already seems the wisdom of this. Cut the Maliki gov’t out and establish direct ties with the Kurds instead of going through the central govt in Baghdad. Allow U.S. companies to buy oil from the Kurds directly on the open market. Train and arm the Kurdish forces to protect themselves from the Islamic State. We can support their boots on the ground with air support in the effort to destroy ISIS.

- Covertly work toward dismemberment of Syria and Iraq into 6 or 7 smaller states. An Arab Christian state (similar to Israel) should be amongst those nations carved out to which the assorted persecuted Christians of other Arab countries can relocate. (I know this was tried in Lebanon once, but this time it has to be a stronger effort)

The Sunnis and Shia would have the benefit of ethnically purer states where they wouldn’t be victims of each others’ animosity. The smaller those nations the better. While we are at it, we should encourage the partitioning of Libya as well. Our long term goal should be the formation of as many smaller and gelded mini-states as possible.

Sadly that isn’t going to happen (at least not by our design) and we will likely continue with these asinine half measures that promote nation building and “installation” of democracy. Instead Christians will continue to flee the Middle East while getting raped, robbed and killed while Western governments simply watch. We will continue to inexplicably (and against our interests) continue to promote a “united Iraq” and a “united Syria” when fate has handed us an opportunity to simultaneously improve our position security-wise AND advance a more workable and peaceful Middle East for the foreseeable future.

Oh, yes, the time is long overdue to have term limits on Congress and judges. Why would we only limit the Executive Branch without having the same constraints on the Legislative and Judicial branches? Why indeed. It appears that the need of limits is really making its case known in these modern times. You see, politics is a “scratch your back, you scratch mine” type of forum. Unfortunately, bias does not belong in any of these branches and when the party trumps the people, the system is surely broken. Case in point is the recent decision on subsidies for ObamaCare sign-ups.

It appears that two conflicting court decisions are at issue: the U.S. District Court (just below the Supreme Court) where a 2-1 decision was handed down stating that subsidies could only be given through state exchanges. By the way; this court had 4 Obama judge appointments placed after Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option in the Senate. The other court, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ( which is supposedly equal to the District Court ) held that the subsides could be granted by HealthCare.gov. What the 4th based there opinion (why would they have an opinion and not a sound ruling?) on is that Congress (read Dems ONLY) had the INTENT to make subsides available for all. Unfortunately, that is not what the law READS.

Here is my beef. We are no longer a nation ruled BY LAW. We have become a nation ruled by the intent of someone’s opinion of how they interpret the meaning of someone else’s thought. Words use to have meaning but, if you read this site enough, you will realize that Dems/liberals don’t use definitive definitions but, rather, however something should be interpreted at the time (which seems to change as constantly as wind direction). So it appears that all branches of government have been corrupted and no longer seem to function as their assigned duties prescribe. An old joke: “What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?” Answer: “A good start!” Don’t get me wrong; lawyers were a needed and noble profession once. Anymore it is a stepping stone for self glorification. It has become corrupted in too many ways and lawyers are ever mindful of side-stepping the rule of law and perverting it. This isn’t the entire profession but a good portion of it. It seems that those same lawyers become judges…..with political ideology and leanings, where law is NOW being made instead of interpreted AS WRITTEN. There is no separation of powers anymore because we no longer have checks and balances as established by the Constitution. Since lawyers won’t clean up their own house, term limits, review boards for misconduct and dismissals are our next line of defense.